From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (relay1.mentorg.com [192.94.38.131]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38ABDE003E1 for ; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 15:52:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from svr-orw-exc-10.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.98.58]) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1RyB7k-0005G9-Ga from Hollis_Blanchard@mentor.com ; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 15:52:28 -0800 Received: from SVR-ORW-FEM-02.mgc.mentorg.com ([147.34.96.206]) by SVR-ORW-EXC-10.mgc.mentorg.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 16 Feb 2012 15:51:44 -0800 Received: from [172.30.11.144] (147.34.91.1) by svr-orw-fem-02.mgc.mentorg.com (147.34.96.168) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.289.1; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 15:52:27 -0800 Message-ID: <4F3D96BB.40503@mentor.com> Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 15:52:27 -0800 From: Hollis Blanchard Organization: Mentor Graphics, Embedded Systems Division User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bruce Ashfield References: <4F3D6431.70505@mentor.com> <4F3D7F0D.3050904@windriver.com> <4F3D883C.8070709@mentor.com> <4F3D8AFD.6080307@windriver.com> <4F3D8EAD.2010602@mentor.com> <4F3D905D.9030903@windriver.com> In-Reply-To: <4F3D905D.9030903@windriver.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Feb 2012 23:51:44.0046 (UTC) FILETIME=[EFC92CE0:01CCED05] Cc: "yocto@yoctoproject.org" Subject: Re: trouble using a local kernel repo X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 23:52:29 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 02/16/2012 03:25 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote: > The point is that the tree is local to your machine, but it doesn't > have to be. You may only have push, not direct commit access. It's > really not asking for anything that isn't already common practice. Hmm, I'm not at all a git expert, but I thought common practice was to clone the upstream git tree, then create local branches that track the upstream ones. I've never seen any directions say "first create a bare clone, then clone that again, then create local branches." >> I'm just trying to test a small kernel/meta patch, and the poorly >> documented list of setup requirements is growing longer and longer. All >> this stuff may be good practice for a more complicated scenario, but so >> far it seems like enormous overkill for my use case... > > So why are you trying to use the technique ? Maybe the answer is that the > docs made it sound like this was the best/right way .. and that's a > problem in itself. The docs don't cover "how do I add a kernel patch?" at all, AFAICS. ... oh wow, now I see http://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/current/dev-manual/dev-manual.html. This actually does talk about bare clones. http://www.yoctoproject.org/docs/current/kernel-manual/kernel-manual.html, which is what I had been reading, does not. > If you do have a single patch, toss it on the end of the SRC_URI and > everything just works like any other package. The reason I'm even bothering is to try to be a good person. I could have stuck this in a private collection 2 days ago... but I figured this is going to bite plenty of other people, so I should try to submit a patch that would fix it for everybody. I could tell the kernel configuration system is complicated, but I really didn't expect this many barriers. Hollis Blanchard Mentor Graphics, Embedded Systems Division